About your Search

20130117
20130125
STATION
MSNBCW 3
CNNW 1
LINKTV 1
MSNBC 1
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
. chris cillizza, the foreign policy, in many regards, has been run out of the white house, and perhaps even more so because mcdonagh, the deputy of national security director is going to be the next chief of staff. >> right. no reason to think that will change. andrea, look, we don't focus enough on foreign policy, but the challenges, we focus on the domestic challenges for barack obama, and as we talked about, his inaugural speech was very domestically focused. look, we just had elections in israel, john kerry not in the same place benjamin netanyahu is regarding a two-state solution, at least right now. there are huge challenges, iran, there are huge challenges in the foreign policy front that don't get talked about as much, but are clearly things that not only will be difficult for the president and his team to navigate, but will also have a significant say in how this president is viewed by history. >> and, by the way, we just got word that the white house is going to proceed with a nomination of general allen to be the nato supreme allied commander now that he's been cleared by th
this at all, richard, to discredit the president on foreign policy? >> i have to say that i think that benghazi is largely a function of people who suffer from obama-derangement syndrome, because i think that people who are kind of looking at the facts, does this trace to the white house, and does it trace to the president or the secretary of the state, and i h think that every bit of information that we have so far the answer to all of the questions so far is no. might they keep hammering it? of course, but at the end of the day, i don't believe we will look back in the second term and said, man, they should have gotten that benghazi behind them, because they have. >> and do you think that we will be talking about benghazi coming up? >> we, the facts and the more that the white house and the administration says this happened and by the way, that happened and not just from the partisan perspective, but coming from the state department and so forth, and with all respect, it is the senate role to ask the tough questions and the question is whether or not it is a legitimate con ver
're also entering into a new age of some beg decision in foreign policy because this country right now is starting to get some adversaries around the world because of our drone policy. that was not the situation four years ago. so this is -- our foreign policy is going to be judged on just how aggressive we get with that, and there's a growing concern in the community across the country about the drone attacks. just how many innocent people are we killing? there's been concerted conversation about we have to reel this in, and president obama, i think, is going to hear a great deal about that when it comes to foreign policy coming up here in the coming months. just how aggressive are we going to get? >> that specific reference that we should not be in a state of perpetual war. >> we are, and it's a different kind of war. >> i mean, that's the -- legally that's the justification that they cite for saying why it is that we can kill people in places where we're technically not waging some sort of war. that there is a global war still underway, and the authorization of using military force
justice. dr. king was a fierce critic of foreign policy in the vietnam war. in his beyond vietnam speech, which he delivered at the york's riverside church, 1967, a year before the day he was assassinated, dr. king calledll the united states the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. "time" magazine called the speech demagogic slander that sounded like a script for radio hanoi. today, we let you decide. we play an excerpt of dr. king's speech, beyond vietnam. >> after 1954, they watched us conspire to prevent elections which could have surely brought ho chi minh to power over the united vietnam and they realized they had been did -- betrayed again. when we asked why they do not leap to negotiate, these things must be remembered. also it must be clear that the leaders of hanoi considered the presence of american troops in support of the diem regime to have been the initial military breach of the geneva agreements concerning foreign troops. and they remind us that they did not begin to send troops in large numbers and even supplies, and to the south, until american forces had mo
. then he becomes a lame duck and then you have to start shifting more and more toward foreign policy, traveling around the world. on the domestic agend ahe has a very short time before he becomes a lame duck. >> the president's inaugural address tomorrow is a tradition that dates back to george washington in 1789. the president plans to look ahead more than back in the speech. let's get some insight from the wall street journal columnist. what are your thoughts on what the president needs to say in order to be most effective, to best set himself up, going into the next four years? >> reporter: well, i don't know. we will find out what he and his aides have decided about that, just about 24 hours from now. i think a second inaugural address is always a little bit difficult, you know? a first inaugural, everybody's new and excited and it's like superman coming out of the telephone booth and showing you the big "s" on his chest. a second inaugural is like, hi, it's me again. so you want to -- you want to try to make it fresh and new anyway. and i think this president has a real opportun
fiscal cliff discussion, the economy is going to get zooming, we're going to -- foreign policy. >> it could end up being in foreign policy, drawing down troops, transitioning to this new kind of fighting force with the drone warfare, sort of in keeping with what we're alluding to eisenhower had. >> i think we're going to watch too very different but equally fascinating dramas play out. inside washington, the republicans still have the votes to stop the president on many things. they still control the house. they still have operational gridlock in the senate, if you will, even though democrats picked up. inside washington, the president has a challenge. but if you look at this, groundbreaking on gaye rights, back to climate change, gun control, immigration. and who that appeals to, as jack just said. they have made a doubling down of what they did in the campaign. they believe they have the coalition of the future -- young people, latinos, african-americans, and they believe the republican coalition is aging, in decline, and fractured. so they think politically they have the jui
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)